The figures on this page are compiled from data files generated by the Bisq software. You can verify everything yourself by running these scripts on GitHub.
Cycle Started17 Oct 2019 / Block 599827
Cycle Ended19 Nov 2019 / Block 604506
Supply Change+ 58,196
Governance24 of 30 proposals accepted
|# of transactions
|Asset listing fees
|Compensation request fees
|Blind vote fees
|Reimbursement request fees
|Net BSQ Supply Change⁵
¹ Proof-of-burn includes trading fees paid in BTC and disputed BTC deposits for trades that went to arbitration (see docs for more details). Funds may be accrued and burned in different cycles, so proof-of-burn figures do not map directly to activity in their cycles.
² BSQ trading fees only. BTC trading fees are included in proof-of-burn.
³ See more details on GitHub.
⁴ Over time, the net impact of reimbursement issuances on BSQ supply is close to zero, as corresponding amounts of BTC are burned through proof-of-burn (see docs for more details).
⁵ Decreases in BSQ supply are good.
This proposal is to create a native Bisq app for Android.
A mobile experience for Bisq has long been desired but has been considered infeasible given resource requirements, power consumption, and other factors.
Recently wiz and bodymindarts made a proof-of-concept that combined an alternative headless implementation called Risq of Bisq with Tor with a native Android interface. After some discussion, it was decided the upcoming gRPC API would be used instead of Risq.
In the end, an initial release of this app with minimal trade functionality and dispute resolution is projected to be built over the next 6 months. Bisq DAO functionality will not be included in this initial release but will be added later.
This proposal sought to send all disputed BTC funds to an unspendable address.
As discussed here, the new trade protocol introduced in v1.2 significantly changes dispute resolution. In case a dispute cannot be settled by mediation, funds in 2-of-2 multisignature escrows are sent to a “donation” address. This donation address is owned by an anonymous Bisq contributor who has locked a 50 000 BSQ bond, and they’re required to use the bitcoin accumulated there to buy and burn BSQ every 4 weeks (or sooner, if the balance exceeds 50% of the bond amount).
This DAO proposal suggested to instead send deposit funds to a burner address (i.e., one not controlled by any Bisq contributor) to avoid the possibility of the donation address holder colluding with a trader to send all funds to them (i.e., entering trades and forcing them to arbitration, which would send all deposit funds to the address they control).
Ultimately, the risk was acknowledged but not considered an urgent issue.
While this is not what people wanted to hear, it’s possible expectations for the new trade protocol were set too high. The new trade protocol does not promise trustless trading and dispute resolution—such a thing may not even be possible. It does, however, reduce trust in some places (no anonymous figure with third key) and decentralize trust in others (responsibility to make traders whole is now spread across the counterparty, mediator, arbitrator, and the Bisq DAO).
And of course, liability on the network itself is reduced significantly without the third key.
How will this new setup work? We shall see. Minimizing the need for dispute resolution (bug-fixing, user interface enhancements, etc) is now a high development priority for the near-future.
In this cycle, work continued on final development, testing, and other preparations for the launch of v1.2. Another weak period of trading volume resulted in another inflationary cycle.